A. The part of the assault related to the Anchonomic chart

Inasmuch as the euthanasia was conducted by means of causing severe pain to the victim, it constitutes the exercise of tangible force beyond social reasonableness, and even if the victim’s mother Nonindicted 1 (the Nonindicted Party in the judgment of the Supreme Court)’s consent was obtained with respect to the euthanasia, the Defendant’s euthanasia constitutes violence and cannot be deemed as a justifiable act.

B. Each part of the assault

The court below determined that it is difficult to believe the victim's prosecutor's statement, but in light of the testimony of the non-indicted 1, 2, and 3 in the court below, since the victim's statement at the prosecutor's office is reliable, the defendant's each assault should be

2. Determination

With respect to the part of the assault regarding the ○○ Man-do, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s act of taking advantage of the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s act of taking advantage of the developments leading up to taking advantage of the Man-do, the prior explanation of the Man-do, the method of taking advantage of the Man-do; and (b) the Defendant’s act constitutes “an act which does not violate the social rules” under Article 20 of the Criminal Act, and the victim’s statement that corresponds to the Defendant’s act of assaulting the victim is not consistent; and (c) it is difficult to believe it as is when considering the circumstance that the victim is the patient suffering from mental fission; (d) Nonindicted 1’s statement is merely a victim’s awareness of the fact of assault from the Man-do; and (e) Nonindicted 3’s statement is not admissible as evidence for conviction; and (e) Nonindicted 2’s statement is reversed and difficult to believe it in light of the relationship with the Defendant on the date and time, it cannot be concluded that there was an injury to the Defendant.

In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence of this case is consistent with the judgment of the court below that found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case based on the above determination of evidence, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts or by misunderstanding of legal principles as pointed out by the prosecutor of the court below

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the prosecutor's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Jong-hee (Presiding Judge)